PGA FORUM

Comments

  • gosixersgo76

    • 14

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #15

      RG Tiered Ranking

    Who’s with me? I hate the fact that if you have 1 guy miss the cut you literally can not win a GPP. I’ve seen someone win a big Fan Duel NBA Slam getting 0s from both shooting guard positions. There should be more opportunity to make up ground if one of your golfers fails miserably. There’s 150 golfers in these fields, it’s silly a lineup can only be made of 6 guys. Also, if DK is going to end late swap for NBA to appease people with jobs/kids/etc who can’t check late scratches, then by that logic shouldn’t they lock the golf contests at midnight the night before to appease people who can’t wake up at the crack of dawn to check for withdraws?

  • db730

    RotoGrinders Media Director

    • 601

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2016 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2016 DraftKings FBBWC Finalist

    Adding a golfer and dropping the lowest score is something I’d LOVE to see DraftKings add. Would help with both the “scratch” factor and keep players more engaged by getting more golfers through the cut.

  • jdubadubs

    Did someone seriously win a big FD slam with two zeroes?. That’s nuts

  • jjwd

    @jdubadubs said...

    Did someone seriously win a big FD slam with two zeroes?. That’s nuts

    Seriously…… that’s epic. Would love to see the link. Also I agree with sixers and Dan on the golf ideas.

  • qatman

    @gosixersgo76 said...

    Also, if DK is going to end late swap for NBA to appease people with jobs/kids/etc who can’t check late scratches, then by that logic shouldn’t they lock the golf contests at midnight the night before to appease people who can’t wake up at the crack of dawn to check for withdraws?

    They will never lock before a contest actually starts since that would cost them money from people continuing to enter.

    I am indifferent to the concept of expanded rosters or dropping scores I do think that expanded rosters leads to more overlap as people will flock to the same ‘value’ golfers, similar to what we saw with 11-man soccer rosters on DK.

    We have seen different variations of rosters across sites – Fantasy Feud had 10, Victiv had 7 (drop 2 lowest). Each has its pluses and minuses but I would argue that if you have someone miss the cut then you probably should not win a GPP.

  • Jk1492

    • 580

      RG Overall Ranking

    Would be fine with adding another roster spot but hate dropping the lowest score for the event. Now if you just dropped the lowest score of your golfers each round I might get behind it. Would still be a significant advantage to have all golfers make the cut but would not be insurmountable either.

  • DomTwan

    But why male models?

  • Tammy409

    @qatman said...

    They will never lock before a contest actually starts since that would cost them money from people continuing to enter.

    I am indifferent to the concept of expanded rosters or dropping scores I do think that expanded rosters leads to more overlap as people will flock to the same ‘value’ golfers, similar to what we saw with 11-man soccer rosters on DK.

    We have seen different variations of rosters across sites – Fantasy Feud had 10, Victiv had 7 (drop 2 lowest). Each has its pluses and minuses but I would argue that if you have someone miss the cut then you probably should not win a GPP.

    I had the opposite problem at 1:00 a.m. Thursday, when after waiting for my NBA wins to credit my account; I went to enter my Euro Silver Bullet and (@ least in the low $ range, all Gpps were gone on Draftkings despite the tourney lock still being a few hours away. All that was there was the free Gpp, so I , not happily, enter it since I’d taken the time to make the entry… It scored 501. Finished with 501, so I assume would have cashed in a real contest.

  • RangerC

    @qatman said...

    They will never lock before a contest actually starts since that would cost them money from people continuing to enter.

    I am indifferent to the concept of expanded rosters or dropping scores I do think that expanded rosters leads to more overlap as people will flock to the same ‘value’ golfers, similar to what we saw with 11-man soccer rosters on DK.

    We have seen different variations of rosters across sites – Fantasy Feud had 10, Victiv had 7 (drop 2 lowest). Each has its pluses and minuses but I would argue that if you have someone miss the cut then you probably should not win a GPP.

    5/7 was WAY better for cash games – felt much more like a skill game and less dependent on 1 shot ruining your LU. You also had the tough choice between 0, 1 or 2 punts (and 3 in GPPs) and it was always difficult and changed from slate to slate, as you would auto lose with a 4/7 but needed to also build in some upside with only 5 scores. It wasn’t great for GPPS of more than 100 entries as there was a lot of overlap, but I’d say that 5/7 Golf is IMO the best DFS cash game and the only cash game I really enjoyed playing (so of course it died).

    Wouldn’t mind something like a 6/7 where you get something like a +5-10 PT bonus for all 7 through the cut – that way you could play a pure punt OR go for 7 through the cut for security / the bonus in GPPS.

  • PigskinaBlanket

    • 337

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #59

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2019 DraftKings FGWC Finalist

    • x2

      2016 DraftKings FGWC Finalist

    I hate this idea. This is all

  • ntanygd760

    Just fine the way it is.

  • MrFantasy

    This would increase the edge for better DFS players. Draftkings would not be interested in that.

  • SelfCharmer

    @qatman said...

    I do think that expanded rosters leads to more overlap as people will flock to the same ‘value’ golfers, similar to what we saw with 11-man soccer rosters on DK.

    Agreed with 100%.

    If you played soccer on DK you could tell everyone was on the same 8/9 players, with your 2 others being the differentials.

    IMO keeping the rosters at 6 is pretty optimal, as it leads to a lot of variation. as for the lock time mentioned above, with DK trying to expand out of the US, it would be pretty unreasonable for them to change the lock times of a sport which is tough on Americans – making it tough for Europeans etc.

    Some of the scoring on golf could be improved though….cough hole in one cough

  • Bighouse55

    Don’t mess with the golf format. Just fine the way it is.

  • Pickle29

    I like the idea of a 7-man roster that drops your team’s lowest scores. I can’t see it leading to TOO much more overlap than there already is, and it would help ease the pain of WD’s happening right after lock. I like the format the way it is already, but I wouldn’t oppose a change like this.

  • PuddinCheeks

    • Blogger of the Month

    I first hand have been wrecked by W/D here lately, the Pieters bee sting, followed now by a Danny Willet surprise back injury. Even though, on both of those weeks the other 5 golfers I had did great, I do not think they should change the rosters or numbers of players. Comparing golf to basketball is a stretch though, since injuries are more rare in golf. The root of the problem is no accurate or reliable method of receiving any news about players before their tee times. I highly doubt the governing bodies in golf have this as a priority either. Maybe RG needs to get in contact with the tournament directors at each event! That is a stretch but is probably the only way to ever know.

    I don’t think adding players or automatically adjusting the lowest scores is good for the game, just my two cents.

  • Mangone

    • 96

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #16

      RG Tiered Ranking

    @db730 said...

    Adding a golfer and dropping the lowest score is something I’d LOVE to see DraftKings add. Would help with both the “scratch” factor and keep players more engaged by getting more golfers through the cut.

    GOAT idea right here by Db

  • mallotc93

    worst idea ever- stick to 6

  • walkoff9

    DK isn’t even smart enough to make the PGA contests big enough to meet demand. So doing something to improve the product is asking way too much.

  • CUTiger81

    I’m not in favor of this idea. I prefer the 6. Getting 6 guys through the cut is viewed as an accomplishment….I don’t like getting a free square.

  • Tammy409

    Sunday Morning, October 23rd as The Euro Event draws to a close, and like most weeks, it takes a little over 620 to win the DK’s Gpp’s and a little over 520 to cash. That’s tight and it’s always a razor thin margin and very difficult to even get your entry fees back; so I think the idea of dropping a ‘mulligan’ golfer would only increase the difficulty and would actually work against the notion that a dropped player would increase one’s chances of success… I mean, to win a Gpp, you have to make zero errors and have a unique lineup and all the stars must align. To even cash, a 6/6 doesn’t get you there many times in recent weeks, so while I understand the motive, I don’t think it gets anyone closer to winning at a min or max payout level… It would just increase ties or near-ties and flood an already crowded mass of ‘almost perfects’ that get nothing as it would make it more difficult to stratify the entries… With the Cutline, at least it wipes away a chunk of the entries. This is golf, we must remember… Sure there are the bonuses and positional points, but at the beginning of each round, every player is essentially trying to score the same thing… We are trying to score ‘different’ from one another as DFs’ers using golfers trying to shoot ‘The Same’ essentially (at or below par)., It’s not a basketball or football game with crazy out of nowhere performances and lopsided team blowouts. 1st and last place are actually prettty close in terms of +/- par…. Make Sense, or am I way wrong here?

    • Putting it another way; say for instance one had no idea what they were looking at (No idea what the sport is) and they see tournament summary. The thought might be ‘Whatever this game was, it had about 70 people in it and they all scored damn near the exact same thing, 275-ish.’ … One wouldn’t look at any other box scores from other sports and draw the same conclusion.
  • BIF

    I don’t like the idea because it’ll become a strategy to take the lowest salary guy as a sacrificial lamb just to top load the other spots – also a very good chance this would lead to way more duped lineups after the low guys are dropped.

  • Jaredmlevitt

    I’m sorry, but this idea might be the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. Not trying to be rude, but it is. if you don’t have all 6 golfers make the cut, the chances of you winning should be tougher. The idea to win is by putting the best lineup out there. If you only have 5 of 6 make the cut, that’s not the best lineup. You can still win a good deal of money, but should you be the winner if you don’t have a perfect lineup?

    What’s next, adding in 2 more numbers to the lottery and if you hit all but one #, you can drop the one # and be the lottery winner?

    On a full baseball slate, there are over 270 players starting but we can only pick 9. Why not add 5 more guys and only pick the best 9? Where does it end?

  • depalma13

    I would like to see them add a weekend contest after the cut and just eliminate points for player placing.

  • Logan7777

    It’s difficult to pick 6 guys out of 150+ to make the cut and give yourself a chance at a win. Those that pick the 6, should be rewarded. If you didn’t pick the 6, you shouldn’t get a mulligan for a poorer lineup.

    The way it’s set up now is almost like a 2 tiered contest: Rounds 1 & 2 to see if you get a 6/6; and then Rounds 3 & 4 to see if you got “the” 6/6 or if your 5/6 or less will get you a cash.

  • Garrincha67

    For me Golf is the best DFS game in the DraftKing’s lobby. Pick six and get them through the cut then look for a strong finish. No reason to change a good product. What they need to sort is contest sizes, payout structure and reasonable rake.

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Subforum Index

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week.

If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537) (IL). Gambling problem? Call 1-800-Gambler (NJ/WV/PA), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO) or 1-800-BETS OFF (IA). 21+. NJ/PA/WV/IN/IA/CO/IL only.